Other "lifeblogging" cameras are also coming closer to fruition: Memoto's GPS-equipped camera automatically captures two 5MP geotagged photos a minute and expects to begin shipping by May. We're also waiting on Autographer, another 5MP wearable camera that uses an array of built-in sensors to take pictures automatically triggered by changes in its environment.

In advance of this brave new world in which we'll all be more widely recorded, some futurists are raising the red flag of caution. If everyone is wearing a constantly recording, super subtle camera, what are the implications for personal privacy, the law and our own safety?

Memoto automatically captures two 5MP geotagged photos a minute. Apps for both iPhone and Android will allow you to access your Memoto images in timeline format searchable by time, date, place and even lighting conditions, with sharing functionality to social networks.

Will we ever be able to keep a secret again? Could "lifelog" data be subpoenaed? Martin Bryant at The Next Web has recently taken the time to explore some worst-case scenarios we felt were worth sharing again.

Bryant asks if the new technology will force us to be more closely guarded in our words and actions, pointing out that today's “don’t tweet that” warning during a conversation could well become “don’t Glass this.”

What types of business and public buildings may ban wearable cameras? We can certainly predict art galleries won't want an entire collection recorded, and such tech could feel uncomfortable while you're trying to unwind in your local pub. Seattle dive bar 5 Point Cafe may be ahead of the curve in its publicity-seeking proposal to ban Google Glass from its seedy surroundings where, according to owner Dave Meinert, customers come for a degree of anonymity.

And while a politician in West Virginia has already proposed a bill banning the use of "a wearable computer with a head-mounted display" (i.e. Google Glass) while driving, Bryant takes this line of thinking far further by considering larger implications of wearable tech and the law, including its potential for fighting crime and for providing the perfect alibi.

So if you won't tolerate it, does that mean you'll leave, or confront? If the latter, how is this different from someone holding up a cell phone, or a street camera? Unless they're actively recording video, doesn't the voice command nature of Google Glasses make it harder to do covert photography than a phone you're pretending to text or talk on (unless there are manual controls, but even then, your hand would be up on the glasses)?

I know who work in the industry my company is in often go to rival stores and take pictures via phone while pretending to talk or otherwise be covert about it. Glasses is kind of the opposite, you're showing everyone you have a camera and, remember, an augmented reality device. Taking pictures should be obvious, not covert(until an app comes out that changes it :P).

The other two, well.. I'll leave them out of this, they are what they are.

The choice isn't yours... past removing yourself from the presence of the other person wearing the thing-a-ma-bob on their face. Just like you can't do anything about a person with a cell phone or GoPro camera.

No, really. James Bond became obsolete years ago. With all the wireless traffic about, and no-one knowing what's being followed, recorded, analysed and sifted for keywords, now everything has advanced to keyfaces, keyshapes, and whatnot at various not advertised light or sound frequencies. Even before cellphones became smartphones, every unit was possible to locate. Next generation cameras will have a geo-locating device which will be communicating both ways too. TV sets? Easy. So, I'd guess, those who behave in not-so-acceptable manner may be worried. The vast majority live the lives so boring that it's not worth looking at, much less recording.

Which is why all emails, phone calls, etc. in the U.S. are recorded in U.S. government fusion centers. Because most people have lives that are "not worth looking at".

Here's a question for you. Anti-wiretapping laws in the U.S. exist[ed] based on the 4th Amendment. Is your contention that the 4th Amendment, which guards against unreasonable search and seizure, was enacted for the benefit of criminals?

In other words, congress said, "Hey! Let's make an amendment that only benefits the bad guys. Nobody who isn't a criminal will care about privacy."

Is that it?

EDIT: Also, none of the people listening and watching are bad guys? No bad eggs in the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc.? Just good people, who would never use your private information in a negative or defamatory way, right? All the agents who framed people, wrongly convicted them, etc. died off years ago, is that it? Just one big collection of Gandhi's, harmlessly looking in at you.

@bobbarber... As with the most laws, the governments of the days long gone have envisioned things from their point of view, which was very far from the reality, and especially this weird one. Also, every text ever written can be twisted around so that it means its exact opposite. There is a finely developed science right for that purpose, and it will have to be something special in human behavior to take me by surprise.Akira Kurosawa said, "In a mad world, only the mad are sane." Looks like I'll have to work on that... :)

How could an amendment that prohibits unreasonable search and seizure have possibly been conceived with anything else in mind but the government intruding into private citizens lives? When this amendment was written congress was thinking precisely of putting checks on government power, with regards to citizen that the government had reason (or not) to suspect of illegal or threatening activity. There is no other interpretation. How is that different from what is going on today? How is claiming that it protects us from electronic surveillance, which for decades was the interpretation of the Supreme Court, twisting things around?

@bobbarber... You make a law to be able to ammend "exceptions" underneath. I'm not trying to explain the intentions of people from other times and places. As far as I'm concerned, the governments of anywhere may look at my life till their eyes pop. My "crime" file still consists only of driving over the speed limit, illegal parking - and occasional disregard of "no photography" signs (usually I'll ask for permission, explaining the purpose, and offering to show the pics).Cheer up, man. There is a new law where I live stating that every pre-paid phone must be registered to its owner. Internet is an open book, cameras are everywhere, and you are recorded in hundred different ways already. This new camera (another one in the long line of all other similar ones) won't change a thing re privacy. There is no such thing for decades already.

There are potential ways in which that won't scale. One, if almost everyone starts wearing some form of it, you basically won't want to go outside. (Remember, almost nobody had a cell phone only a few years ago)

Two, it is likely that Google Glass is the crude beginnings of this technology. In the future, you probably won't be able to tell by looking whether you are being recorded, scanned, or looked up because the tech will become invisible or miniaturized into standard glasses frames or contacts.

If you are in a public space, you have no rights to privacy. That is very well established. Do you do the same if a person is holding a camera? And you tell the person to not take pictures if he/she tries? How childish.

I have no rights to privacy, I admit. But I don't have to engage with you if I choose. I'm not being childish, I just don't like what you're doing and I'll vote with my feet. Wear your glasses. I just think it's creepy and invasive.

Exactly. If any invention can be used to make you pay, it will be pushed, advertized, made wanted and have all possible legislature tweaked to make it possible.Look at a-GPS in your phone, and wonder why it has to be paid, as opposed to the normal GPS receiver? Sure, there are answers to that... but you can't switch the "assisted" option off. Homo sapiens has been crippled-down to Homo reddens (paying) a long time ago, and paying is what makes a "good citizen"...

First of all, I called this technology a long time ago (repeatedly here actually). And I was rebuffed with how it won't happen or can't happen.

Well it's not going to stop here.

It doesn't take much imagination to realize where this is headed. Everyone has a video camera, 3D even. So why not just record what our own eyes are seeing. And beyond that, improve our vision and allow zoom-capable nano-lens layers to allow for zooming without adversely effecting appearance. With flagship glasses, the capabilities expand even more allowing users to change lenses just by changing their glasses. And far into the future, I see technology that causes people to amputate their own limbs because the ones we make are better. Technology will never stop.

Everyone's carrying around a phone with a camera, potentially recording what's around them, SLRs record video and the one around someone's strap can be too, laptops and tablets and gaming devices often have built in cameras and how about all those security cameras absolutely everywhere? It'll be a fad to freak out over wearable cameras like the google glass but eventually will be as irrelevant of a subject as all the other cameras around us that many have gotten accustomed to, and might as well have forgotten about them all together.

I would NOT want my every move to be recorded.Seriously.The Truman Show, anyone?What amazes me most about all those evolutions, is that it is not some extraneous power (the proverbial Big Brother) that wants to control people 24/7 and annihilate their privacy, but that the lemmings are doing that themselves, and willingly.Big Brother is watching you? No.All those Little Brothers are allowing themselves to be watched.

The real crime is loss of privacy. you cant do anything without being recorded. Some states require both parties to agree on being taped. What do you prefer, a slight increase in safety for living in a prison? Most people do not want to be recorded 24-7. Go be a cog for the borg but do it in your own house. You are naive to think this will not be abused. You will be filtered and sent advertising and have a score that tells all about you. This has to be the line in the sand.